So, for all the military folk on TW I though this might be an interesting topic. Without becoming too political about this (i.e blaming one party/official...) Please do not sully this with political bullshit...(Obama bashing, Bush bashing, congress bashing, etc etc etc), thanks

Lets discuss this... I for one think that no other profession deserves a pension system such as the current military one than us military folks. I think it is a travesty how DoD and the Federal Governement wants to take away our hard earned benefits. I for one say look somewhere else suits! Haven't you already taken enough from us? Long deployments away from home, 5,796 dead in current wars, many times that injured, mental stress, physical stress, emotion, broken homes, divorces, babies without parents, etc etc etc ...

I think you're overreacting. It didn't say anything about cutting the retirement, but instead restructure. Essentially you don't have to serve 20 to receive a pension, rather DoD would contribute to the government TSP. Personally I think it would take awhile for anything like this if approved to take effect. Changes to military retirement always comes up every year. The biggest cost for DoD is legacy retirement costs, so that means they will probably match the corporate sector at some point. Thee good thing is once the Generals pay starts to get effected, they will raise all kinds of holy hell.

I think you're overreacting. It didn't say anything about cutting the retirement, but instead restructure. Essentially you don't have to serve 20 to receive a pension, rather DoD would contribute to the government TSP. Personally I think it would take awhile for anything like this if approved to take effect. Changes to military retirement always comes up every year. The biggest cost for DoD is legacy retirement costs, so that means they will probably match the corporate sector at some point. Thee good thing is once the Generals pay starts to get effected, they will raise all kinds of holy hell.

Click to expand...

I don't think he is overreacting. It actually states that if you stay 20 yrs you would receive 37.5% of pay compared to 50% currently. The current retirement system was my biggest incentive to stay active duty as supposed to getting out and going reserve/guard. If it does go through this will be the biggest slap in the face that anyone can give to current service members. It's sad that this is being seen as a plausible solution when there is so much more to cut out first.

"15 years of service. Troops would immediately begin accruing new benefits in a TSP account. If they remained in service for five more years, they would receive three-fourths of the “old plan benefit,” about 37.5 percent of their pay at retirement, as an annuity."

I'm a civilian and I think this is a big slap in the face to every one that has ever wore the uniform. I believe you have done a service that most Americans would never do. If anything you should make more. The Government has been trying to get into my pension for years (Railroad retirement act) since we don't pay social security it's for railroaders by railroaders.

I TOTALLY agree that there is not one BIT of over-reacting going on here, I have been in for going on 11 yrs, and to lose a percentage on that pension after doing 20yrs of HARD-EARNED service is BS. There are many benefits to being in the military and as said before, MANY hardships as well. Servicemembers that do their time & sacrifice alot in their lives to defend this country are due nothing LESS or any BS re-structuring program so they can save a few bucks. There will be many very angry people & many great service members that will get out if this happens, & I may just be one of them because that is the stupidest idea yet.

Another civilian here who thinks military retirement benefits should be raised and the first thing that should be cut is our inaffective administration's benefits. They are not nearly earning them, their job requirements/risk don't deserve them and should be the first cuts and non-payments anytime monetary budget issues arise. Veterans deserve much better than they ever have gotten IMO. I personally would be willing to pay more taxes if it went to benefitting veterans but no fucking way do I want to pay more for the suits to piss away on countries that hate us and their own personal gain while in D.C.

I've been in for 8 years... under that new plan if I stay another 12 then I'll get 20% of my highest 3 years pay after 20 years of service and have an additional 16.5% put into a vulnerable TSP (think 401K w/o matching)...which I may or may not access at end of service...

I think its BS, I signed a contract on the stipulation that I'd get 50% at 20 years...

I've missed birthdays, deaths, holidays, graduations... I've been shot at, almost blown up, seen a friend die, I've shared a tube with 200 dudes for 4 months, I worked in the desert and at sea... I've fought fires, broke up fights, stood in the freezing rain, managed multimillion dollar accounts, tracked russian and chinese submarines, ate shitty food, sweated my balls off in a tent, been divorced, and always held the American Flag HIGH...all in 8 years... and this is the thanks I get. I did all this partly for my country and partly for the associated benefits.

Many... Many more service members have done far more, been in far longer, and so many have sacrificed so much more than I have. This is how America wants to repay them.

The "real" America appreciates all that has been done for this country and are disgusted by the nonchelant treatment of veterans as well as active duty soldiers by our government. Another way our representatives are failing. They in no way represent how the country values our soldiers. Non-representative elected officials are expendable, heroes are not!

Another civilian here who thinks military retirement benefits should be raised and the first thing that should be cut is our inaffective administration's benefits. They are not nearly earning them, their job requirements/risk don't deserve them and should be the first cuts and non-payments anytime monetary budget issues arise. Veterans deserve much better than they ever have gotten IMO. I personally would be willing to pay more taxes if it went to benefitting veterans but no fucking way do I want to pay more for the suits to piss away on countries that hate us and their own personal gain while in D.C.

Click to expand...

This times INFINITY !!!

Cut the expensive and worthless scum in D.C., not the hard-working servicemembers [or 'regular employees' in other professions].

NO Chrome,3" NFab's steps,TRD skid,Wet okie's.011 grill, k&n,5100's,All this comes right off when the old lady says let's go get a NEW ONE!!!

I hate this but over the next 10 years so I think we are in for cut backs on everything. Over the last 10 years we have spent our way to the poor house. My 95 year old mom in law got a letter this year that says she has to buy her own ins. as medicare will no longer cover everything. She can do it as she has some money but what are the poor going to do. We all need to get ready for a rough ride. Just my 2c worth............ Jim

I think it's BS for those who are serving now anticipating the program that is in place to be there for them at retirement & for me since I am already drawing.
Does the current enlistment contracts include any clause?
I cannot remember since it has been awhile since I signed one.

I'm keeping tabs on this through AUSA (for Army folks) for I am a member. I do not know if the other branches have similiar organizations specifically created to fight for us on Capital Hill. The Association fights for us plus your local state elected officials, such as senators & representatives, you can voice your opininon on such matters.

Also, remember since 1997, Air & Army Times is now owned by Gannett Publishing Company the largest newspaper publisher in the U.S. Personally, I think the tone of the paper has changed somewhat since it was acquired though it is still widely popular & AAFES #1 selling newspaper fwiw.

I don't think he is overreacting. It actually states that if you stay 20 yrs you would receive 37.5% of pay compared to 50% currently. The current retirement system was my biggest incentive to stay active duty as supposed to getting out and going reserve/guard. If it does go through this will be the biggest slap in the face that anyone can give to current service members. It's sad that this is being seen as a plausible solution when there is so much more to cut out first.

"15 years of service. Troops would immediately begin accruing new benefits in a TSP account. If they remained in service for five more years, they would receive three-fourths of the “old plan benefit,” about 37.5 percent of their pay at retirement, as an annuity."

Click to expand...

good chance you'd be grandfathered in at the rate you were expecting.... that's what usually happens.

This is a current trend among all gov't agencies. They want to cut benefits to high risk positions while keeping spending fat. They want to spend more money for thier own agendas instead of taking care of thier employees. The politicians of this great land need to understand you have needs and wants. Spend money on the needs and take care of the wants when things get better. Pensions and retirement benefits are the best scapegoats politicians have to raise taxes. So basically they throw you under the bus to raise taxes. Meanwhile nobody mentions the fact that when you do at least 1 term as a representative, senator or whatever, you get medical and a pension for the rest of you life and all you did was take up space for a few years on the taxpayer dime. Keep in mind you did not have to do 20 years of hazzerdous service! Thank you for the service and dedication to our country, everyone here appreciates it.

I appologize, but i am going to play devils advocate here...Although i do believe that CURRENT service members that have signed a contract should get their promised pension, why should they not change their pension setup for incoming service members? If someone signs up with 37.5% in their contract, they are signing up knowing full well that they will not be getting 50%, only 37.5%. It seams fair to me anyways, being a civilian who has had their 401k/pension go through the crapper. Things are not what they used to be for our economy. Another option for a higher percentage could be longer service time. Instead of decreasing the percentage add 5 + years to what is needed to retire. I know that service people invest a lot of time and sacrifice a lot during their period of serving, but retiring at 38, assuming that they enlisted at 18, is someone unrealistic to todays retirement standards.

Also i would like to say that there are better places to trim fat throughout the government than from the lowest paid and hardest working government employees.

I appologize, but i am going to play devils advocate here...Although i do believe that CURRENT service members that have signed a contract should get their promised pension, why should they not change their pension setup for incoming service members? If someone signs up with 37.5% in their contract, they are signing up knowing full well that they will not be getting 50%, only 37.5%. It seams fair to me anyways, being a civilian who has had their 401k/pension go through the crapper. Things are not what they used to be for our economy. Another option for a higher percentage could be longer service time. Instead of decreasing the percentage add 5 + years to what is needed to retire. I know that service people invest a lot of time and sacrifice a lot during their period of serving, but retiring at 38, assuming that they enlisted at 18, is someone unrealistic to todays retirement standards.

Also i would like to say that there are better places to trim fat throughout the government than from the lowest paid and hardest working government employees.

Click to expand...

I gotta tell ya, I have been in 18 years and I am BEAT UP from head to toe. The small injuries from deployments and training add up. Another five years is a tough pill to swallow for any of us. I see where you are coming from but it just is not realistic to compare what we do to the average job holder...